Posted
by
Zonkon Tuesday December 18, 2007 @12:04PM
from the plumbers-vs.-space-operas-in-a-fight-to-the-death dept.

Along with the news that more than half of the US is playing games, the November NPD numbers offer an interesting insight into the games industry. The ongoing console war was white hot, with record hardware sales. The Wii outsold the PS3 by half a million systems last month, and is quickly gaining on the Xbox 360's total sales figures. The big winners last month were software publishers, though, with a record $1.3 billion in sales. "Obviously Call of Duty 4 performed well on both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3. It is now second only to Halo 3 for first-month sales numbers on the Xbox 360. On the PlayStation 3 no other game has launched as well as Call of Duty 4 in November. Super Mario Galaxy performed extremely well for its first month. Two new properties - Assassin's Creed and Mass Effect - sold well enough to make the top 10. Across both platforms, Assassin's Creed was actually the second best selling game of the month. It is amusing to note that despite the unprecedented Nintendo DS and PSP sales, no game for either system sold well enough to make the top 10 software list for November."

It surely is a better way to understand the sentence. I've spoken English all my life and I did not understand what was being said on the first read-through. After that I went through slowly and ran the sentence back and forth, parsing at different points by trial & error. The "better way" surely seems better to me, although I have to admit that once I read it I already knew the intent from deciphering the original.The original sentence was not clear at all and it is only by sheer luck that you could

The so called xbox/ps/nintendo "console war" has been going on hot and heavy for what, 7+ years now? Can we stop calling it "white hot" and finally conceed that the each console of this generation is filling a different need, as shown by last month's NPD data? Galaxy sold well, COD4 sold well, Assasin's creed sold well, Mass effect sold well, Halo 3 sold well, the DS and PSP hardware sold well, even if they didn't have any standout games. To me, that sounds like everybody's pretty damned happy about this holiday season, and even though the ps3 isn't doing as well as the rest, they will catch up eventually. Everyone has nailed what they were trying to accomplish this gen. Congrats to all the consoles and software developers.

I think that because there is still competition, that's what makes the story continually interesting. In other words, this type of back-and-forth with similar market shares amongst many systems is the type of competition that would exist in the computer software world, were it not for certain monopoly-like forces. If either nintendo or sony "won", then there wouldn't be any story anymore.

Sorry, there will always be a "console war." The war is caused because a large number of people can only afford to buy one console. These people choose the one that they think will be the best console. Once their purchase is made, they will fight to convince everyone (including themselves) that their console is the best because, more than anything else, people like to believe that they made the best decision. So you can't end the "console war" without changing human nature.

Sorry, there will always be a "console war." The war is caused because a large number of people can only afford to buy one console. These people choose the one that they think will be the best console. Once their purchase is made, they will fight to convince everyone (including themselves) that their console is the best because, more than anything else, people like to believe that they made the best decision. So you can't end the "console war" without changing human nature.

This sort of behavior happens any time a decision has been made and there is a conflict over that decision, and is caused by several well-known cognitive biases (mostly originating from confirmation bias).

The market seems to be splitting as well. There seems to be a much more distinct break up of whats games ends up on which system. The wii is getting novel party games (doing well everywhere). The PS3 still has a lock on the traditional Japanese franchise (given the world wide sales distribution this will continue to be true, doing well in Japan, poor in the US), while the 360 is getting many more of the American titles (and also doing poorly outside the US, well in the US).

Compared to the PS2 and 360, yes, but Sony was still pounded by Nintendo in Japan last week. I think that the market in Japan is becoming more geared towards mobile platforms (DS and PSP are doing exceptionally well), although your point about the 360 stands.(The ranking page [m-create.com]. Note that they use the common abbreviations for all but one of the various consoles. This charts the software sales over the past week, sorted by the last column. At the bottom of the page is another chart with, presumably, the hardwa

Their at about 1/3 of the wii. The Wii is a smashing beyond all hope success. I'd argue that the PS3 is doing well compared to the outrageous success of the wii. Sales plotted against the 360 world wide sees the PS3 at roughly the same spot the 360 was last year. So it's going to be a three horse race with competition for 2nd. Competition is always good. Because frankly, despite the success most Wii games aren't my cup of tea. I love fire emblem but almost the entire rest of the library is aimed at someone

"The market seems to be splitting as well. There seems to be a much more distinct break up of whats games ends up on which system. The wii is getting novel party games (doing well everywhere). The PS3 still has a lock on the traditional Japanese franchise (given the world wide sales distribution this will continue to be true, doing well in Japan, poor in the US), while the 360 is getting many more of the American titles (and also doing poorly outside the US, well in the US)."

VG chartz is a unreliable source. They project based on basically random criteria what the sales will be. Until the quarterly media create and NPD come out vg chartz is usually a wild guess. After the quarterlies come out vgchartz updates their numbers. They've been off more often then not. But according to vgchartz:

The market seems to be splitting as well. There seems to be a much more distinct break up of whats games ends up on which system. The wii is getting novel party games (doing well everywhere). The PS3 still has a lock on the traditional Japanese franchise (given the world wide sales distribution this will continue to be true, doing well in Japan, poor in the US), while the 360 is getting many more of the American titles (and also doing poorly outside the US, well in the US).

That's just not true at all.I'm more interested in the japanese games, and for those, your analysis is plain wrong.First, the PS3 has no lock on the traditional japanese franchise, at all. The "locks" you see are for games which have started being developed 2 years before even the PS3 launch, and can't be wasted.Instead, what we see, is that the traditional Japanese franchises have started jumping ship to the Wii.How could anyone looking at the japanese market miss that? Dragonquest, Monster Hunter, Final

In a product field like game consoles, confirmation bias can coincide with enlightened self-interest or can fill the same logical need. The more people think Console A is great and represents the future direction of all consoles, the more content gets targeted to Console A. If this is in addition to another console or in place of another console that would have been the exclusive target for that content, then it's a win for the owner of Console A. It's one of the few instances in which a format war or platf

The so called xbox/ps/nintendo "console war" has been going on hot and heavy for what, 7+ years now?

No it hasn't. The last generation's war began when the PS2 launched in 2000, and was decided by 2003 already, when it became apparent that neither the XBOX or the GameCube would be able to dent the PS2's market.

And simply put, whichever console wins gets the best games. There might be a few gems now and then, but the market leader simply has the upper hand in securing exclusive deals and developers interest.

Why do you think the PS3 is selling better in Europe than the 360? The graphics are pretty much comparable, and the 360 has a much larger library of games and is less expensive. Is the Blu-Ray drive a bigger factor in Europe than in America?

I don't have either; the only next-gen console I have is a Wii. But if I was to get one of the two, it would be the 360, purely because of the game selection. I'm just pushing that purchase off as long as possible, hoping the console will be more reliable and chea

People in Europe don't particularly like microsoft and their antics. Europe went nuts over the PS and PS2, they like what they get with the Sony consoles and seem to be sticking with it. Most of my friends won't entertain getting a 360 even back when there was no PS3. Halo has been the only real magnate for the xbox machines.Those of us that have the have the Wii, are bored pretty with it. No one really wants a crap version of what they can get on a PS3, the Wii's graphic are really shit when you're used to

Apathetic over the Wii? Then explain why it's almost as hard to get in the UK as it is in the US.
I'd buy a 360 over a PS3 and you'll find lot of other Europeans are too if you ever spoke to anyone outside of the official Sony fan club. Try checking Amazon.co.uk's games sales list, the top 3 PS3 games are at 18th, 40th and 61st, not exactly what I'd call a triumph.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is a textbook example of "raving fanboy":) Students in the crowd, I hope you're taking notes!

Honestly guy, give it a rest. To still be trying to claim that in late 2007 is borderline delusional.

Uh huh. Let's ignore the more patent examples like Madden '07, which is universally agreed to look a great deal better on 360 compared to PS3. This may simply be due to EA being incompetent, so let's ignore that. We see consistently that cross-platform games like COD4 and Assassin's Creed look identical on both platforms (there are many side-by-side comparison videos on both game

"The PS3 will play every single big name franchise so many Europeans bought PS2s for. Anyone suggesting that all those PS2 gamers are going to give up all those big name titles for a graphically weaker, absurdly unreliable console just to save 50 to 100 bucks?"

*sigh* I should learn that you can't attempt reasonable and moderate posts in a console thread without getting flamed.

" The graphics are pretty much comparable,"
Honestly guy, give it a rest. To still be trying to claim that in late 2007 is borderline delusional.

But they are. The PS3 is better in some games, the 360 is better in others. I expect that in the long-term, the PS3 will turn out to be more powerful, but they are clearly similar. Just like the original X-Box was in the same league, but slightly superior, to the Gamecube. They are both graphically superior to the Wii, which is closer to last gen graphics. The 360 & PS3 are close enough in power to negate it as a serious advantage for one consoleor the other.

"is less expensive"
When has console price EVER been a factor in which system gamers buy? Saving 50,100,150 dollars to give up on all the games for an entire generation? PS2 owners are still working through their insanely large library of games and are upgrading to PS3s when the price drops to their own personal price point.

I think that your last sentence contradicts your first. Price is always a factor, in everything anybody buys.

The 360 library is garbage. Halo 3 is a basketcase, Mass Effect is a massive step backwards in rpgs with last gen looking graphics, Lost Planet and Dead Rising were mediocre titles, Forza and PGR are jokes compared to GT.

I think this statement is probably most indicative of your skewed perspective. Saying the graphics on a PS3 are better than the 360 is completely reasonable. Saying the PS3 has a better library of games is silly. By the time that you make this claim, the vast majority of readers have dismissed you as a partisan troll. The selection of games and the price are the two major liabilities the PS3 has.

The PS3 will play every single big name franchise so many Europeans bought PS2s for. Anyone suggesting that all those PS2 gamers are going to give up all those big name titles for a graphically weaker, absurdly unreliable console just to save 50 to 100 bucks?

Well, the 360 is more successful than the PS3 in the US. Lots of people here have given up all those big name titles for a "graphically weaker, absurdly unreliable console". Are they all wrong? Besides, most of those titles will eventually migrate to whatever console is most successful. There are no loyalties among companies, just temporary alliances.

After 6 to 7 billion dollars and six years on the market you have to start thinking the rumors of Microsoft planning on exiting the console market have truth to them.

What rumors? Oh, you mean the one you're trying to start?

The US is the only market the 360 is selling decent numbers but it appears that there are a massive number of current 360 owners who are either re-buying 360s or buying newer models hoping to get a console that doesn't have the RRoD or disc scratching issues.

Yeah the increased sales are totally because of the RRoD issue. Lets just totally ignore the fact that Microsoft replaced most of the consoles with RRoD issues by paying out of their own pocket. They counted these replacement consoles as a loss, not as sales but lets not quibble with minor details. There's just no way that Halo3, Mass Effect, CoD4, BioShock, and Assassin's Creed had anything to do with the increased sales of the 360 in the last quarter.

You are smoking some very good crack there pal. The 360 is bombing in Japan, but guess what? Japan doesn't matter nearly as much as it used to. Gaming is far more mainstream in other parts of the world (see the Wii) and that is adding additional customers everywhere. Japan used to be very important, but it's shown now that you can do well in North America and Europe and develop a really solid install base. As for you re-buying consoles supposition, well that's just anecdotal bullshit and you know it. You do

Does anyone care to discuss the difference in attach rates? The summary didn't specify the PS3 or PS2 attach rates, but it did come out and basically show the 360 has nearly twice the attach rate of the Wii. They also mention how Wii sports isn't included in the attach rate, but Wii Play is. I know we like to revel in the success the hardware is enjoying, but should there be concern as long as this attach rate gap exists? Should Mario have sold something more like 3million in the first month to bring it

They are useless for comparing pretty much anything as they are "per console". When consoles have been out for different lengths of time it's meaningless to compare attach rates. If xbox owners have had an extra year (or whatever) to buy games then you'd expect it's attach rate to be higher (a more impressive back catalogue that extra time generates will also help). Perhaps there might be some value in comparing the Wii and 360 attach rates x months after launch.

In short the "attach rate" has too much of an historic component to tell you clearly what is going on "now" which is the interesting thing.

Attach rates are only a useful measurement for console manufacturers selling consoles at a loss. In that situation the manufacturer knows that it has to reach a certain attach rate to claw back that loss before it can even think about a profit (though that is changing now they have additional profit streams such as subscriptions, virtual consoles, blu ray etc).

For everyone else you may as well just talk about total games sold. Dividing it by the number of consoles doesn't tell you anything useful.

It does matter because at some point when the console was released becomes irrelevant. Nintendo needs to sell more games per console to make it attractive for 3rd party devs. Look at the top 20 sales for the last few months and you'll see that despite having basically the same number of consoles out there the 360 continues to outsell the Wii software wise. The Wii sells well on big first party titles, but 3rd part is pretty well a no show. If I am a dev and I see that I can sell twice as many games on the 3

The attach rates affect 3rd party developer interest in the system. Nintendo, despite their words, have proven time and time again that they intend to make a system that support primarily their own games, not anyone else's. This has negatively impacted 3rd party participation (whether Nintendo cares or not is unknown) on the Wii, and failing attach rates will drive support down further. Whether this even matters in the Wii's meteoric success is unknown:P

Attach rates are not actually relevant to 3rd party developers in the abstract. Only the number of games sold compared to the cost of development is. The PS3 has a higher attach rate than the Wii, but it is much more expensive to develop for, and there is a much smaller market. The PS2 did not have a great attach rate, but it was much more popular to develop for. The reason you are not seeing as much 3rd party support is because the Wii's success was unexpected and design cycles take a while. Expect to

Most of the casual gamers that I know that have a Wii have Wii Sports and a couple also have Wii Play because it was a cheap way to get an extra controller and more party games. They really have no desire to buy many more if any. They see it as a "party" box and that's it.

I am wondering if this is a big trend on the system. The numbers sort of suggest this, but a previous poster did point out that history can bias attach rates. The system is profitable on a per-unit basis and demand is high, but what sort of success is there if the system never really sells titles or attracts good 3rd party investment? The odd thing is that a model of success where hardware units are the only important factor more resembles a plug-in model for revenue than the more traditional razor and b

I've had a Wii for just over a year (Got one 2 days after launch). I got a xbox 360 this past week mainly for my girlfriend to play katamari, and so that we'd have some more generes to play. The Wii has disappointed with engaging titles. I loved Zelda, played Super Paper Mario, and lots of virtual console titles. But there is no real engaging 20 hour+ story line games on it right now. As much as I hated to give money to M$, I hated more to give it to sony. The xbox has ads everywhere, but has a smooth expe

The 360 has been out for over two years. The Wii has been out for just over a year. Add the fact that most developers thought the Wii would bomb and the lack of titles isn't surprising. Give it time and you will see an abundance. Also, I strongly disagree out the Wiis graphics. Metroid Prime 3 is beautiful.

As many have realised, Nintendo changed the rules and have taken themselves out of the war.There is currently a two side race to the best HD next gen console between MS and Sony, MS are currently winning that hands down and I don't think Sony (outside of Japan) have a hope of catching up.

Nintendo have left the race, and the war by creating a fun, cheap, party machine that is attracting a new type of buyer as well as a proportion of the traditional gamer market.

The biggest problem with the Wii is that the market they captured doesn't buy many games. So, it's still not a super attractive development platform for 3rd party devs. You also have to dedicate more resources to making a Wii specific game because of the unique control scheme, where the other 2 have pretty standard controls. The Wii is a good console, but it's very first party heavy.

I'd agree entirely, many Wii owners will only buy 2 or 3 games during it's lifetime.

Personally I look out for anything that scores over about an 8 on gamespot (in both critic and user areas) and I buy that, otherwise I make sure I try stuff first, consequently I reckon I'll buy maybe 8-10 games max (so far its only Wii sports, Wii play, Res. Evil, Mario Galaxy and GH 3).